We're torn between complaining about Washington Post's delinquency in covering anything to do with our crumbling electoral system and jumping for joy that they've actually filed a credible report on the problems we (and many other "conspiracy theorists", "sore-losers", "tinfoil hat wearers", "anarchists" and "insurgents") have been yelling and screaming about for months --- if not years!

Given our endlessly optimistic nature, however, and the dearth of honest-to-God reporting by the Mainstream Corporate Media on these matters since...well, forever...we'll go ahead, slap a siren on this item, and focus on the "victory" side of things!

In tomorrow's paper, page A6, in a "Special to The Washington Post", Zachary Goldfarb covers the matter of last month's hack of Diebold optical scan machines in Leon County, Florida which completely flipped the results of a mock election test without a trace being left behind.

As well, for the first time, WaPo even discusses some of the findings of the non-partisan Government Accountability Office (GAO) 107-page report on the failures of electronic voting machines which was released last October!

The story cannot be good news to Diebold and the other voting machine vendors, however. They've all had it pretty easy up until now as the Mainstream Corporate Media has played into their "company line" that such concerns were the stuff of "conspiracy theorists" and "sore-losers". Goldfarb even recognizes the fact, even if he doesn't call WaPo on being one of the media outlets who have contributed to Diebold and Friends' appalling ability to marginalize Election Integrity advocates with such insultingly dismissive and democracy-loathing remarks:

Questions about the security of electronic voting machines have been circulating widely in recent years. But many of the concerns have been dismissed as the fantasies of Internet conspiracy theorists or sore-loser partisans who could not accept that their candidates simply got fewer votes. Critics have not demonstrated that any real elections have had returns altered by the manipulation of electronic voting systems.

But the questions raised by [Ion] Sancho [Election Director of Leon County, where the hack demo occured], who has held his post since 1989, show how the concerns are being taken more seriously among elections professionals.

"While electronic voting systems hold promise for improving the election process," the Government Accountability Office said in a report to Congress last year, there are still pressing concerns about "security and reliability . . . design flaws" and other issues.

Well, there it is. In plain black and white WaPo ink! Go figure!

Goldfarb goes on to make the case quite clearly concerning the Diebold hack as pulled off by Finnish computer security expert Harri Hursti, including Diebold's pathetic response to it:

Using a device bought for about $200, he was able to easily alter the final vote by changing the program stored on the memory card.

"You have to admit these systems are vulnerable and act accordingly," Hursti said.
...
"More troubling than the test itself was the manner in which Diebold simply failed to respond to my concerns or the concerns of citizens who believe in American elections," he said. "I really think they're not engaged in this discussion of how to make elections safer."

He is also critical of state officials who he believes should have caught the vulnerabilities earlier. He said that vendors such as Diebold have too much influence in the administration of elections, a view that resonated with Lida Rodriguez-Taseff, the founder of the Miami-Dade Election Reform Coalition. Sancho is "truly an advocate for voters," she said. "What he is doing in Leon County goes completely against the grain of county election commissioners elsewhere, who are allowing vendors to dictate how to run their own elections."

WOW! I'm absolutely shocked this is in the Wp. Now I wonder if it will get picked up by any others? I can only hope. Yes Brad it seems they are starting to listen.I hope this will help the cause! Is it possible that they don't want to see the end of this country either? Well I can dream can't I? Thanks Brad for all you have done to get this to the public.

COMMENT #3 [Permalink]...
Can We Count?
said on 1/21/2006 @ 11:11 pm PT...

Will wonders never cease...

I must point out that "...Critics have not demonstrated that any real elections have had returns altered by the manipulation of electronic voting systems..." because UNTIL Ion Sancho stepped up to the plate, critics HAD NO ACCESS to the voting systems and therefore COULD NOT review and document that which they suspected from all the circumstantial evidence piling up around them... And the mass media laughed at their earnest, untiring efforts... Until now.

So at last, thank you Zachary Goldfarb (and WashPost Editors) --- you've FINALLY broken through the dam around Washington, D.C. that's been holding back the truth from the people who probably need it the most.

And if you wish some fertile ground for further reporting, follow the legislative trail of the hopelessly-compromised HAVA law:

The dreadful HAVA law was sponsored and overseen by the corrupt (and Abramoff-linked) Rep. Bob Ney of Ohio. HAVA promoted utterly unproven, poorly tested, and bug-ridden vote-counting machinery and software manufactured by a handful of Ney's partisan for-profit corporate backers (at federal taxpayer expense). This vote-count-outsourcing boondoggle of a law is on a par with the Medicare Part D drug fiasco, and both need immediate revisiting and a thorough overhaul by the Congress.

Lets hope the Dems will wake up to this news and play it for all its worth! I read on Huffpost that two democratic house members are intoducing legislation for public funded elections.No more corporate money! Lets push our Reps to co-sponsor this legislation,Bring them all down and prosecute!

Jeff, Doug... They have been counting on our fear of what will happen if we try to smack them down! Every single bit of news that looks like a victory, on ANY blog, always comes with comments about the horrors of what might happen when these fiends are cornered.

Go back and watch Al Gore's MLK Day speech. REMEMBER many Americans have had as much and MORE to fear than we do, and yet they took care of our liberty and justice for all. The very thing that guarantees our security is our willingness to die for our Declaration of Independence, our Constitution, our Bill of Rights. Hundreds of thousands of Americans have gone to their deaths for us, so that this might never happen to us. NOTHING should make us shrink from our duty to keep that faith. NOTHING.

Freedom is not easy. We chose the duties of liberty. Patrick Henry's All-American cry was taught to each of us as children. It was not a story. THAT is what it takes to be American. It has been our duty all along, and we won't flinch from it now.

You do realize that if it comes to that, we will be fighting the Mossad and CIA in the streets!????

Do you realize how much evil you are really dealing with??? It wasn't Bin-Laden, damn it, all the attacks on america's capital were never him.

We were meant to think so...and it wasn't any, ANY americans who did 9-11. Not a one...agents from foreign governments performed a virtually bloody silent coop. There are traitorous spies in the Pentagon Agent99, foreigners from Ukraine, Israel, Turkey and especially Pakistani ISI.

And they are all the neocons.....and I have seen proof, proof positive they did 9-11....with virtually no assistance at all.

It will be a mighty nasty time......Chertoff, a dual spy for Ukraine/Israel controls the Department of Homeland Security and we are the Mid-East's puppet..

I disagree with Doug E. totally. Consider the alternative, i.e., never shedding light on corruption. The top 2% on the wealth-and-power scale fight over the nation's resources, the government controls the military, and the other 98% are their subjects. If elections are held at all, they're rigged. That's the way banana republics function.

A few people have died for this cause already. A few more Ray Lemmes and Paul Wellstones can be expected. Any of us is vulnerable. So be it. That's what revolution is all about...ask the descendants of Nathan Hale.

It makes me wonder if this stuff will get on the weekend talk shows ... or whether it will be covered up with a mine story ...

Not that attention on mine disasters is to be ignored, but these election matters are more crucial but have not been covered. Brad and bloggers here have been discouraged or angered at the lack of coverage.

Maybe this will dampen my skepticism.

The journalist even mentioned the GAO report. Wow, when the MSM does what is journalisticlly correct then I salute them.

This is serious. If the Dems want to win elections, they should take this up immediately. I have always been skeptical about these machines, and we should insist of paper ballots at the next election. It is important that we make a hue and cry about this, so that this can be resolved. The Dems cannot afford to be complacent about this.

I will have to examine the entire article, but my impression is that it is a weak description of the situation. True, we should rejoice that a "mainstream" paper decided that there MIGHT be something to electile disorders. I wish Media Matters would go back and count the number of times the same paper used dismissive language to consign the story to the dustbin. I believe you would find this momentary spark of coverage about the only attempt at "balance" available.

I agree there are lots of weak points in the article. (E.g., the closing quote that integrity depends on procedures and integrity of election officials--without mentioning that we shouldn't also be forced to vote on machines that were designed for hacking, and that were never tested for security threats.

No mention of the windfall coming from twisting HAVA's language, no mention of the corruption involved in passing HAVA in the first place. No mention of the lies vendors told to election officials and members of the public.

The risks mentioned in the GAO were scarcely mentioned.

Letters to the Editor, anyone?

The final impact of this article may depend more on how we all respond to it, rather than the article's presence in and of itself.

I have a little inside info, something bigger is coming, and it will probably be within the next month. Keep your shoes on, this thing is about to break wide open. As we speak, there is an investigation going on that will make Ion Sancho's test look like child's play. All the hard work of the EC community will be worth it.

The likely use by political thieves of electronic voting systems whose votes and tallies can be secretly changed without consequence [no paper trail, no proof] comes from the same poisonous-to-democracy root as the likely immoral use by political thieves of data from secret domestic spying without consequence [no records, no court or congressional oversight].

You are SO right on! Sacrifice of personal security is always called for in a crisis, if true change is to be effected. Are we all soft, complacent, selfish, inertia-bound slugs who wait for the world to happen TO us, never acting upon reality ourselves? NO!!!

The danger is undoubtedly greater than even the best-informed among us imagine; but it is the danger of evil and annihilation and MUST be resisted implacably.

Brad is doing his bit. WaPo has a lot of catching up to do. Page A4 indeed...

CanWeCount says above, "The dreadful HAVA law was sponsored and overseen by the corrupt (and Abramoff-linked) Rep. Bob Ney of Ohio. "

Excellent comment. Beware of the "corruptors" sponsoring legislation pretending to fix corruption, but actually assuring it continues. This is another GOP strategy. Beat the Dems to sponsoring legislation that's actually meant to make the said reform harder to fix.

Gee...aren't the Republicans the ones trying to be the first to sponsor legislation to "clean up Congress" in light of the Abramoff scandal?

I detect a pattern. Great comment. It made me realize the GOP-sponsored HAVA bill was a "wolf in sheep's clothing" as far as election reform. It made me realize that's what the GOP is now doing with their "cleaning up Congress" lobby reform, too. Trying to make another bill that's actually a "wolf in sheep's clothing" to deter lobbyist reform.

It's not a Republican or Democrat thing, it's a "power" thing. Those in power, want to make sure they stay in power. If the Dems were in power, they'd be trying to make sure they stayed in power. Legislation has to be for the good of everyone, not just designed to keep those in power...in power.

OT, but we better keep an eye out for the GOP "cleaning up Congress" lobbyist bills next. What are they cleaning up? Themselves? Or are they sponsoring bills to "appear" to be cleaning up Congress?

Yikes! Doesn't this mean that something horrid is going to happen now? Or have we been on the short end so long that the scales are just beginning a slow-but-accelerating sway back in our direction that will just keep going until it's even again and we (or rather, our cause...not good to make it too personal--breeds irrationality) are vindicated by the scheme of things at large?

...................

Wait! Someone look out the window real quick and see if there are four big scary guys on horses...this could be the end, folks--so make your peace.
(I guess this is a good time to admit that I am so not a natural blond and I cheated at solitaire twice last week. And once today. Oh, and I've had a crush on Mr. Ed and Deputy Dog since 3rd grade, but we're still just friends, I swear.)

By the way folks:
If you have an electronic voting machine, and you choose to "write in" a candidate rather than select from the menu options, how does that vote get counted? In other words, if we held an election on a Diebold machine and wrote-in a candidate, how could the voting officials account for those votes? I am unaware of any laws that prevent write-ins, and I was always seen them tabulated in the paper-ballot days, so I presume it is a legitimate voting behavior. Wasn't the woman who ran for mayor in San Diego a write-in candidate? How did they know how many votes she received? Just asking...

RLM, #9... Thank you. I should have included Nathan Hale in my little rant. He regretted having only one life to live for his country, as he was giving it, and Patrick Henry bellowed, "...give me liberty, or give me death," at a very crucial moment.

Storm, #15... I feel it, so I believe you.

Everybody... It COULD be that important people took Al Gore's speech to heart, and enough of them remember Nathan and Patrick from grade school, realize that these were not childish things to be put away, that they were the REASON we are here. Maybe we will finally see our country, our MSM, awaken from the long nightmare.

My emails and many others must have finally broken through to the Washington Post, and the realized the neocons totally control our elections.

Because the neocons are virtually in control of the elections, and have whipped the media into shape the second any corporate media gets a grip of it they will go ballistic!!

I can just see the headlines on CNN: "Computer expert testifies at hearing he proved Diebold and ES&S machines could flip votes....without ever leaving a trace."

And then shortly after "Hacker admits he had access to election software in 2002 races..."

And who knows what else. The problem being? The neocons will go totally insane, and try to destroy this country for good if the voting system is completely ripped apart in front of the public.

Abramoff and all his cronies, these neocons from various foreign countries installed these voting products to have control of everything. Everything. It goes all the way to the top.....to an even worse reality that the Washington Post now will come to understand....

Counting write-in votes on optical scanners has caused a lot of problems. Often (as in San Diego) votes weren't counted if the voter wrote in the name but didn't ALSO fill in the oval. In other locations there were overvotes because the voter DID write in the person's name and also filled in the oval. Different rules apply in different places. In both cases the voter's intention was clear, yet the votes were disqualified.

You're right that this poses a problem.

I don't know how this is done with touch-screens. Is there a keyboard attached or something? Or maybe one has to use a special absentee ballot?

"I pledge allegiance to the Flag of the United States of America, and to the Republic for which it stands: one Nation under God, indivisible, With Liberty and Justice for all."

Do you remember what it was like to be a kid, and having to say those words? For me, it always seemed like a chore. Having to get up every morning, put your hand over your heart, and say the Pledge. A kid has better things to do with their time, don't they?

That being said, there were times when I felt proud to say those words.

For instance, do you remember when the United States' hockey team beat the Soviets in Lake Placid during the 1980 Olympics? WOW. I was only 8 years old when that happened, but I watched A LOT of TV as a kid, so I remember the coverage from Philadelphia's Action News. I remember saying the pledge in 2nd grade, after my teacher reiterated what I had seen the night before, and thinking how proud I was to be an American. It didn't bother me to say the pledge that day.

Wow WAPO told a little of the truth while still getting its digs in on A6.
I guess that makes all the CIA inspired lies on A6 365 days out of year ok.
Here is a little story about this revered newspaper.

Philip Graham, Meyer's successor, had been in military intelligence during the war. When he became the Post's publisher, he continued to have close contact with his fellow upper-class intelligence veterans - now making policy at the newly formed CIA - and actively promoted the CIA's goals in his newspaper. The incestuous relationship between the Post and the intelligence community even extended to its hiring practices. Watergate-era editor Ben Bradlee also had an intelligence background; and before he became a journalist, reporter Bob Woodward was an officer in Naval Intelligence. In a 1977 article in Rolling Stone magazine about CIA influence in American media, Woodward's partner, Carl Bernstein, quoted this from a CIA official: "It was widely known that Phil Graham was somebody you could get help from." Graham has been identified by some investigators as the main contact in Project Mockingbird, the CIA program to infiltrate domestic American media. In her autobiography, Katherine Graham described how her husband worked overtime at the Post during the Bay of Pigs operation to protect the reputations of his friends from Yale who had organized the ill-fated venture.

After Graham committed suicide, and his widow Katherine assumed the role of publisher, she continued her husband's policies of supporting the efforts of the intelligence community in advancing the foreign policy and economic agenda of the nation's ruling elites. In a retrospective column written after her own death last year, FAIR analyst Norman Solomon wrote, "Her newspaper mainly functioned as a helpmate to the war-makers in the White House, State Department and Pentagon." It accomplished this function (and continues to do so) using all the classic propaganda techniques of evasion, confusion, misdirection, targeted emphasis, disinformation, secrecy, omission of important facts, and selective leaks.

Graham herself rationalized this policy in a speech she gave at CIA headquarters in 1988. "We live in a dirty and dangerous world," she said. "There are some things the general public does not need to know and shouldn't. I believe democracy flourishes when the government can take legitimate steps to keep its secrets and when the press can decide whether to print what it knows."

Jeff: There are plenty of blogs where invective and personal attacks are O.K. I've found Bradblog to be a cut above; right-wingers are welcome, even trolls are O.K. Sarcasm is tolerated, but ad hominem attacks and mindless name-calling aren't.

For those open to a world view of 911 which differs from the official story via the Bush administration, wrap your mind around this motive posted by
General Leonid Ivashov, former Chief of Staff of the Russian armed forces who is quoted in a Cuban newspaper saying: The organizers of [the nine eleven] attacks were the political and business circles interested in destabilizing the world order because they were not satisfied with the rhythm of the globalization process or its direction. Americans have their fingers in that pie. See the article: Russian General speaks

Everyone please sign the petition urging Senator Boxer to get out in front on Election Fraud. Diebold is currently rolling across America just in time for '06. Unless a prominent politician (NOT Kerry, ahem) speaks out and forces the mainstream media to address this issue, we're all in big, big trouble. Boxer was the only senator to stand up against the seating of the Ohio electors in the stolen 2004 election. I believe she can be swayed. Urge everyone you know who cares about the fate of America to sign this petition.

Now over 1100 signers! Two weeks left to go until I send it! Sign NOW!

Someone from the National League of Women Voters left me a message a few days ago apologizing for not calling months ago after I had sent them a letter. My letter voiced my concern about the "hackability" of the tabulators. The woman who called said that they had been following this for some time and appreciated my interest. Hard telling how serious she was, but I'm hoping the League of Women Voters actually lets the MSM know they have a huge stake in the pursuit of truth about these machines. I have repeatedly written letters to newspapers and posted on blogs my opinion that the companies that make the machines really don't care who pays them to cheat - they're in it for the money. In the next election, it just may be the Democrats who do it.

Washington DC, Jan 30 / PR Newswire (link) - A little-noticed voting rights lawsuit has made its way to the U.S. Supreme Court (Docket No. 05-930). It constitutes the first legal challenge to the widespread use of nontransparent voting systems. Specifically, the lawsuit challenges the use of voting machines and absentee voting in elections for public office.

The lawsuit was originally filed by freelance journalist Lynn Landes in July of 2004 in Philadelphia federal court (U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania). The Third Circuit Court of Appeals ruled against Landes on November 2, 2005.

In her lawsuit Landes claims that, as a voter and a journalist, she has the right to direct access to a physical ballot and to observe the voting process unimpeded. Voting by machine or absentee, Landes claims, introduces obstacles and concealment to a process that must be accessible and transparent in a meaningful and effective manner.

Landes is representing herself in this action.

"I tried to get civil rights organizations interested in this case, but had no luck. Their disregard for this issue is incredible. It's clear to me that without direct access to a physical ballot and meaningful transparency in the process, our elections have no integrity whatsoever," says Landes.

The defendants in the Landes lawsuit are Margaret Tartaglione, Chair of the City Commissioners of Philadelphia; Pedro A. Cortes, Secretary of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania; and Alberto Gonzales, Attorney General of the United States.

Attorneys for the defendants have successfully fought Landes, claiming that she did not prove an injury and therefore does not have standing. Landes counters that she has the right to challenge the constitutionality of acts of the legislative branch under federal statute and case law, most significantly under Marbury v. Madison, 5 U.S. 137 (1803).

Early American history seems to favor the Landes position. Prior to the Civil War, voting was a public and transparent process. It was only after the war, as the elective franchise expanded to minorities and women, three changes to state and federal election laws were adopted that eventually made the voting process a private and nontransparent enterprise: absentee voting was allowed (1870's), the Australian secret ballot method was adopted (1880's), and voting machines were permitted by Congress (1899).

Today, 94.6% of all votes are processed by machines and approximately 30% of all voting is conducted early or by absentee.

The defendants' response is due at the Supreme Court no later than February 24, 2006. The Landes lawsuit can be found at the following url: www.EcoTalk.org/lawsuit.doc